similar to: Capturing Function Arguments

? Sat, 17 Feb 2024 11:15:43 -0700 "Reed A. Cartwright" <racartwright at gmail.com> ?????: > I'm wrapping a function in R and I want to record all the arguments > passed to it, including default values and missing values. This is hard if not impossible to implement for the general case because the default arguments are evaluated in the environment of the function as it

Hi All, I'm building an autograding framework for my biostatistics class this semester, and I am exploring different ways to automatically grade figures. In other classes, I teach ggplot2 and I extract information directly from the ggplot2 object. However, in this class we are using base R and I need to extract information from base-r graphics. I've tried several different approaches,

Hi folk, I'm writing a set of small C code to verify whether my pass handle some instruction correctly. One of the instruction I want to test is "va_arg", but compiling my variadic function does not generate any va_arg instruction. Is va_arg deprecated? Will va_arg instruction ever be generated by any front-end? The source code and llvm instructions are appended as follows. the

Neal, FYI, my group has added a flag to llvm-gcc for emitting the va_arg instruction (instead of lowering in the front-end), and we also have an implementation of the VAARG instruction for X86-64. (which is currently not implemented in the LLVM backend). Both of these things will be sent upstream to LLVM soon, pending some more testing and review. If you are dire need of these features now, I

I noticed i had mail_location wrong, i was specifying INDEX=/dovecot-index instead of INDEX=~/dovecot-index so i modifed and restarted dovecot, one of my techs that happens to have thousands of emails reopened her mail and this showed up in the log. Not sure if this is critical or if more info/dovecot -n is needed dovecot: 2009-05-05 14:06:38 Panic: imap <REMOVED>: file mail-search.c: line

Wouldn't it make programming more error-resistant if vectors were initialized with missing data, instad of zeroes or ""? That way, if you assign values to a vector elementwise and you miss some elements (because their indices were not selected or because the assignment didn't work out, see below for code examples) this would be immediately obvious from the value of the vector

Hello, On Mac OS X, certain Aqua/Quartz UI functionality requires an application to be launched from within an app bundle, or (alternatively) requires a Carbon application with a resource fork. Playing with the wxWidgets distribution, I discovered that it is quite easy and transparent to make such a Carbon app from (I guess) any command line application. When applied to the R executable called

Hello, On Mac OS X, certain Aqua/Quartz UI functionality requires an application to be launched from within an app bundle, or (alternatively) requires a Carbon application with a resource fork. Playing with the wxWidgets distribution, I discovered that it is quite easy and transparent to make such a Carbon app from (I guess) any command line application. When applied to the R executable called

Fellow developers, I'm parallelizing loops to be called by pthread. The thread body that I pass to pthread_create looks like define i8* @loop1({ i32*, i32* }* nest %parent_frame, i8* %arg) parent_frame is pointer to shared variables in original function 0x00007f0de11c41f0: mov (%r10),%rax 0x00007f0de11c41f3: cmpl $0x63,(%rax) 0x00007f0de11c41f6: jg 0x7f0de11c420c

Hello Everyone, I am trying to create two modules in LLVM, where first module contains the definition of a function, gcd in this example and another module contains a call to this function. My example is based on the following tutorial, with a few changes. http://llvm.org/releases/2.6/docs/tutorial/JITTutorial2.html When I execute the verifier pass on my modules, it complains that the

Hi, > I'm parallelizing loops to be called by pthread. The thread body that I pass > to pthread_create looks like > > define i8* @loop1({ i32*, i32* }* nest %parent_frame, i8* %arg) > parent_frame is pointer to shared variables in original function > > 0x00007f0de11c41f0: mov (%r10),%rax > 0x00007f0de11c41f3: cmpl $0x63,(%rax) > 0x00007f0de11c41f6:

Dear All I'm making an instrumentation pass. The pass is supposed to modify the given IR in a specefic way. One of the required modifications is to insert a call to a function at a specific location. This is the signature of the called function: void myclass::foo(Function *f, BasicBlock* b) This function's prototype is in an foofile.h file in include/llvm And the function

On 27/07/07, Evan Cheng <evan.cheng at apple.com> wrote: > Code generator shouldn't introspect the LLVM type at all, except to > get the size of the type. Anything needed should be encoded by the > front-end. In the short term, please focus on getting parity with > what we already have. This means x86-64 will be wrong, but it > already is. As a second step we can then

On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Rafael Espindola wrote: > Sorry for the delay. I am back from a vacation and have been busy > catching up.... Welcome back :) > That is why I need the types (just for the size). This is necessary to > implement both the current behavior and the correct ABI. Right. > consider the llvm code > --------------------------------------- > %struct.s = type {

? Fri, 05 Jul 2024 14:35:40 +0300 "Erez Shomron" <r-mails at erezsh.org> ?????: > This works as expected: > with(mtcars, plot(wt, mpg, plot.first = { > plot.window(range(wt), range(mpg)) > arrows(3, 15, 4, 30) > })) I think you meant panel.first, not plot.first. At least I cannot find any mention of plot.first in the R source code. In this example,

Code generator shouldn't introspect the LLVM type at all, except to get the size of the type. Anything needed should be encoded by the front-end. In the short term, please focus on getting parity with what we already have. This means x86-64 will be wrong, but it already is. As a second step we can then worry about x86-64-specific param attributes that should be added to handle

Is the following a bug in your opinion? I think so. This works as expected: ``` with(mtcars, plot(wt, mpg, plot.first = { plot.window(range(wt), range(mpg)) arrows(3, 15, 4, 30) })) ``` This does not. ``` plot(mpg ~ wt, data = mtcars, plot.first = { plot.window(range(wt), range(mpg)) arrows(3, 15, 4, 30) }) ``` With error: ``` Error in arrows(3, 15, 4, 30) : plot.new has not

In order to the code generators to lower functions arguments that have the "byval" attribute, they would have to access the original argument Type. For example, on linux x86_64 {i64, i64} should be passed on registers and {i64, i64, i64} goes on the stack. The problem is that when looking at (for example) FORMAL_ARGUMENTS, the only thing that is present is the type of the pointer itself

Hi, 2.2.25 crashes on FreeBSD with a kqueue-related message. I see references to something similar (http://www.dovecot.org/list/dovecot/2012-February.txt) from a couple years ago. I get: Jul 1 10:07:27 imap dovecot: master: Panic: kevent(EV_ADD, READ, 54) failed: Bad file descriptor It's not dumping core, and I get the message even with "protocols =" Downgrading back to 2.2.24

I'm not sure if this is a known peculiarity or a bug, but I stumbled across what I think is very odd behavior from delayedAssign. In the below example x switches values the first two times it is evaluated. > delayedAssign("x", {x <- 2; x+3}) > x==x [1] FALSE > delayedAssign("x", {x <- 2; x+3}) > x [1] 5 > x [1] 2 The ?delayedAssign documentation says